EĞİTİMSEL SİNİRBİLİM NEUROEDUCATİON : EĞİTİMCİLER NEDEN SİNİRBİLİM VERİLERİNDEN YARARLANMALIDIR?

Eğitim, farklı disiplinlerin bulgularından yararlanan bir bilim dalıdır. Sinirbilim ve eğitim etkileşiminin bilişsel sürece yönelik bir açımlama getirdiği söylenebilir. Bu çalışma, diğer disiplinlerle etkileşimi olan eğitimin, sinirbilim bulgularından nasıl yararlanabileceğine ilişkin bir farkındalık kazandırmaya yönelik bilimsel tartışma kapsamında tasarlanmıştır. Eğitimsel sinirbilim neuroeducation yaklaşımı sinirbilim ve özellikle bilişsel sinirbilim alan araştırmalarının bulgularını bütünsel bir biçimde anlamak üzere düzenlenmiştir. Böylece, disiplinlerarası çalışmalarla eğitim boyutuna katkı sağlamayı hedeflemektedir. Bu çalışamada, öğretmenlerin “bilişsel sinirbilim araştırmalarının sonuçlarının sınıfta nasıl uygulayabilecekleri sorunu alan araştırmaların sonuçlarına göre tartışılmıştır. Eğitimsel sinirbilim kavramı “beyin tabanlı/uyumlu öğrenme” kavramından farklı olarak alınmıştır. Her iki kavram temelde aynı gibi gözükse de eğitimsel sinirbilim kavramı daha geniş bir içeriği ele almaktadır. Sonuç olarak öğrenmenin uygulamasında, öğrencinin motivasyonu, duyguları, konuşması, kelime dağarcığı, kavramsal anlaması, problem çözme becerisi, toplumsal yaşam becerileri için sinirbilim, bilişsel sinirbilim ve eğitim verileri birbirini destekleyecek bütünlükte olmalıdır.

Neuroeducation: Why educators should employ neuroscience findings?

Education is a scientific field that makes use of findings from multiple disciplines. The interaction between neuroscience and education has opened new avenues for cognitive processes. This study is designed to expand upon scientific discussions that provide insights into how the interactive discipline of education can use findings from neuroeducation, which offers a holistic approach to findings from neuroscience and specifically cognitive neuroscience. The aim thus is to contribute to the field of education in multidisciplinary studies. In this study, the question of how teachers can "apply the results of cognitive neuroscience research to class" are discussed according to the results of the researches in the fields of neuroscience and cognitive neuroscience. Neuroeducation conception is approached differently than “brain-based/adapted learning”. Although both conceptions appear alike to each other, neuroeducation covers more extensive contents. This study is based on the findings from research in neuroscience and cognitive neuroscience. The premise therefore is that the findings from neuroscience, cognitive neuroscience and education should make a coherent whole for students’ motivation, emotions, speaking, vocabulary, conceptual understanding, problem-solving skills and ability to live in the community

PDF

___

1. Ansari, D., De De Smedt, & Coch, D. (2006). Bridges over troubled waters: Education and cognitive neuroscience. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences. 10(4), 146-151.
2. Ansari, D., De De Smedt, Coch, D., & De_ De Smedt, B. (2011). Connecting education and cognitive neuroscience: Where will the journey take us. EducationalPhilosophy and Theory, 43(1), 37-42.
3. Ansari, D., De De Smedt, B., & Grabner, R. (2012). Neuroeducation a critical overview of an emerging field. Neuroethics, 5, 105-117.
4. Ansari, D., & Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2017). Developmental cognitive neuroscience: Implications for teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. In S. Guerriero (Ed.)
5. Educational research and ınnovation pedagogical knowledge and the changing nature of the teaching profession. Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264270695-en.
6. Brandt, R. (2012). How educational neuroscience will contribute to 21st century education. Creating an appropriate 21st century education. Information Age Education. Eugene, Oregon, USA.
7. Bruer, J. T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational Researcher, 26, 4–16.
8. Byrnes, J. B. (2001). Minds, brains, and learning: Understanding the psychological and educational relevance of neuroscientific research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
9. Campbell, S. R. (2011). Educational Neuroscience: Motivations, methodology, and implications. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 7-16.
10. Carew, J. Thomas, & Susan H. Magamen (2010). “Neuroscience and education: an ıdeal partnership for producing evidence-based solutions to guide 21st century learning”. Neuron Journal. 67(5), 685-688.
11. Circk, F. (1996). Şaşırtan varsayım. S. Say (Çeviren). !nkara: TUBİT!K.
12. Erlauer, L. (2003). Brain compatible classroom. Alaxandria, VA:Association of Supervision Curriculum Development, USA. Ferrari, M. (2011). What can neuroscience bring to education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 31-36.
13. Fischer, K. W. (2009). Mind, brain, and education: Building a scientific groundwork for learning and teaching. Mind, Brain, and Education,3(1), 3-16.
14. Gazzaniga, M. S. (2004). The cognitive neurosciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
15. Geake, J. (2011). Position statement on motivations, educational neuroscience research: FMRI studies of the neural correlates of creative intelligence. Educational philosophy and theory, 43(1), 43-47.
16. Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology,74(1),1-14.
17. Gökberk, M. (1996). Felsefe tarihi. İstanbul: Remzi.
18. Howard-Jones, P. !. (2011). ! multiperspective approach to neuroeducational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 24-30.
19. Jensen, E. (2006). Enrich the brain. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pub.
20. Koyuncu, B. (2010). Zenginleştirilmiş beyin uyumlu öğretim ortamına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi. 16(1), 73-92.
21. Liben L. S. (1977) Memory from a cognitive -developmental perspective . In Overton .W.F., & Gallagher J.M. (Eds.), Knowledge and development. Springer, Boston, M A. Liu J. C., & Chiang, W. W. (2014). Theory, method and practice of neuroscientific findings in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 629–646.
22. Mehta, A. (2009). “Neuroeducation” emerges as ınsights into brain development, learning abilities grow. http://www.dana.org/Publications/Brainwork/Details.aspx?id=43782 adresinden 22.09.2016 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
23. Merriam, S., Caffarella, R. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
24. OECD (2017). Centre for educational research and ınnovation (CERI). http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/ centreforeducationalresearchandinnovationceri-brainandlearning.htm adresinden 22.09.2016 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
25. Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
26. Rose, S. (2008). 21. yüzyılda beyin. Levent Can Y. (Çeviren). İstanbul: Evresel Basım Yayın.
27. Samuels B. M. (2009). Can the differences between education and neuroscience be overcome by mind, brain, and education? Mind, Brain, and Education, 3(1), 45-54.
28. Schrag, F. (2013). Can this marriage be saved? The future of ‘neuro-education.’ Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(1), 20-30.
29. Senemoğlu, N. (1997). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim kuramdan uygulamaya. !nkara: Ertem Matbaacılık.
30. Schunk, D. H. (1998). An educational psychologist’s perspective on cognitive neuroscience. Educational Psychology Review, 10 (4), December, 411–417.
31. Sheckley, B. G. & Bell, S. (2006). Experience, consciousness, and learning: Implications or instruction. In S. Johnson & K. Taylor (Eds.), The neuroscience of adult learning, new directions for adult and continuing education (ss 43–52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
32. Sigman, M. et al. (2014), Neuroscience and education: Prime time to build the bridge. Nature Neuroscience. 17(4), 497-502.
33. Sousa, D. (2011). Mind, brain, and education: The impact of educational neuroscience on the science of teaching. Learning Landscapes, 5(1), 37-43.
34. Squire, L. R. (2004) Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective, Eurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82, pp. 171–77.
35. Standish, P. (2012). This is produced by a brain-process!’ Wittgenstein, transparency and psychology today. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(1).
36. Stein, Z., & Fischer, K. W. (2011). Directions for mind, brain, and education: Methods, models, and morality. Educational Philosophy and Theor.43(1), 56-66.
37. Sylwester, R. (1995). A celebration of neurons: An educator’s guide to the human brain. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
38. Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2010).
39. The new science of teaching and learning: Using the best of mind, brain, and education science in the classroom. New York, NY: Columbia University Teachers College Press.
40. Tommerdahl, J. (2010). A model for bridging the gap between neuroscience and education. Oxford Review of Education, 36(1), 97-109.
41. Vaninsky, A. (2017). Educational neuroscience, educational psychology, and classroom pedagogy as a system. American Journal of Educational Research, 5(4), 384-391. Doi: 10.12691/education-5-4-6.

Türk Akademik Yayınlar Dergisi (TAY Journal)-Cover

ISSN: 2618-589X
Başlangıç: 2017
Yayıncı: Bayram TAY

Arşiv

Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

ÖĞRETİM ELEMANLARININ PEDAGOJİK YETERLİKLERİNE İLİŞKİN ÖZ ALGILARI VE ÖĞRENCİ GÖRÜŞLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ AHİ EVRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ ÖRNEĞİ

Menderes ÜNAL, Fadime DAĞISTAN

AİLEDEN ÇOCUĞA SOSYAL BİLGİLER EĞİTİMİ: UYGULAMA ÖRNEĞİ

Hatice TÜRE, Handan DEVECİ

SINIF ÖĞRETMENİ ADAYLARININ EPİSTEMOLOJİK İNANÇLARININ BAZI DEĞİŞKENLER VE FENE YÖNELİK TUTUMLARI AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ

Adem TAŞDEMİR, Muhammet Emin BOYSAK